Japan-U.S. Relations: Issues for Congress

Summary

Recent Developments

Prime Minister Shinzo Abe in September 2015 won overwhelming support from his ruling Liberal Democratic Party (LDP) colleagues for a second three-year term as party president. Abe ran for the party presidency unopposed. Abe's victory means that he will continue as prime minister; the Japanese Diet's (Parliament's) Lower House of Parliament chooses the prime minister, and Abe's LDP-led coalition controls more than two-thirds of the seats in the Lower House. Unless the LDP changes its rules limiting party presidents to two three-year terms—something it has done in the past—Abe's term in office will end in 2018. If he continues in office until the fall of 2017, Abe would become Japan's longest-serving prime minister since the 1960s.¹

Abe's unopposed re-election as LDP president came despite polls showing that his public support has weakened. For more than two years after leading the LDP to power in December 2012 elections, Abe's public approval ratings in most polls remained at or above 50%, extraordinarily high by recent Japanese standards. Abe rode this public support to two more election victories: the LDP-led coalition retook control of the Upper House in 2013 elections and retained control of the Lower House in 2014 elections. However, throughout 2015 support for his Cabinet has fallen steadily—in some polls to the high 30% level—coinciding with Abe's push to pass landmark security legislation (see section below). The legislation has led to large-scale protests of tens of thousands of people outside the Diet building, and in the summer of 2015 Abe's disapproval ratings surpassed his approval ratings for the first time.²

Despite Abe's apparent decreased popularity, few observers of Japan's political scene believe that Abe's premiership is in jeopardy, at least in the short run. In addition to facing no challengers in the LDP at the moment, Abe is benefitting from the apparent disarray in Japan's major opposition parties, whose rate of support is at or below 10% of voters. Two political developments to watch in the coming months are how the LDP coalition fares in July 2016 elections for the Upper House and whether Abe's poll numbers dip into the 20%-30% range, which historically has signaled trouble for the sitting prime minister.

Abe and Park have not yet held a bilateral summit, though they have met on several occasions, and Chinese President Xi Jinping's brief meeting with Abe in November 2014 was the leaders' first since both took office in 2012 (they held another short meeting on April 23, 2015). Despite lingering issues surrounding Abe's earlier visit to the Yasukuni Shrine and Japan's handling of the "comfort women" issue (see "Abe and Historical Issues" section), Tokyo's ties with Seoul and Beijing appear to be on a very modest upswing, with working-level efforts continuing to defuse the most acute tensions that have marked Japan's relations with its Northeast Asian neighbors since Abe took office. Abe, Xi, and Park are scheduled to meet together in Seoul in late October 2015, which would be the first trilateral summit since 2012. Some Japanese and Korean media sources report that an Abe-Park summit may be held in conjunction with the trilateral meeting.³

The LDP's efforts to pass controversial security legislation, and the efforts of political opponents to thwart its passage, dominated the Diet's summer session. The security legislation is a package of new laws and amendments to existing laws that, collectively, will expand the scope of Japan's security activities. The new legislation will implement the July 2014 Abe Cabinet decision enabling Japan to engage in collective self-defense under certain conditions (see "Collective Self-Defense" section). Japan's military, called the Japan Self Defense Forces (SDF), will be legally permitted to help defend the United States (or another country) if it comes under attack and that attack threatens Japan. The SDF will have more latitude to provide logistical support to the U.S. military and other forces that are engaged in overseas missions protecting Japan's security. The security legislation also expands the SDF's rules of engagement to facilitate the rescue of Japanese nationals overseas, more robust peacekeeping activities, inspection of ships suspected of illegally transporting weapons, and other cooperative security activities. Overseas dispatches of the SDF will still require Diet approval but will no longer require special legislation to authorize each mission, as in past dispatches.

The LDP's push to pass the legislation generated intense opposition, both in the Diet and among the general public, particularly after an LDP-chosen constitutional scholar testified that the Abe cabinet's decision was in fact unconstitutional. This galvanized widespread protest: local assemblies passed resolutions and nearly 10,000 scholars and public intellectuals signed petitions opposing the legislation.⁴ In July, public protests materialized: media outlets in Japan claimed that over 100,000 people demonstrated outside the Diet buildings after the bills were introduced, although police put the numbers closer to 30,000.⁵ Demonstrators criticized the laws as unconstitutional and claimed that they risked pulling Japan into U.S.-led wars overseas.

Japan has been negotiating a potential free trade agreement (FTA) with the United States since it became the 12^th and latest country to join the Trans-Pacific Partnership (TPP) talks in July 2013. From a U.S. perspective, Japan's participation greatly increased the economic significance of the potential FTA, but also introduced a number of challenges into the TPP negotiations, particularly in the areas of auto and agricultural trade liberalization. Bilateral U.S.-Japan market access issues appear to be largely resolved; however, Mexico and Canada have raised concerns about the reported U.S.-Japan agreement on auto rules of origin. This and other contentious issues, including the level of protections for biologic drugs (drugs made from living organisms) and market access for dairy products, reportedly prevented the 12 countries from reaching an agreement at the latest ministerial meeting in Maui, HI, in late July 2015 (see "Bilateral Trade Issues").⁷ Trade ministers noted significant progress made at the meeting, suggesting a final deal was nearly achieved,⁸ but according to press reports key differences remain and political timelines in TPP countries could make concluding the agreement difficult in the near future.⁹

President Obama and Prime Minister Abe have made the agreement a centerpiece of U.S.-Japan bilateral relations, but both leaders may face increasing headwinds in their TPP efforts. U.S. elections in 2016 could make a politically sensitive trade vote more difficult in the U.S. Congress, while Prime Minister Abe's ability to push his trade agenda may be constrained by his falling approval ratings, the considerable political capital he has expended on controversial defense legislation, and by Japan's Upper House elections in July 2016.

The Maui ministerial was the Obama Administration's first TPP negotiation under the congressional grant of Trade Promotion Authority (TPA).¹⁰ Congress has constitutional authority over U.S. foreign commerce and would be required to approve implementing legislation if a completed TPP agreement is to apply to the United States. TPA is the authority that allows for trade agreements negotiated by the President to receive expedited legislative consideration if they advance U.S. trade negotiating objectives established by Congress and meet certain notification and consultation requirements. In particular, implementation legislation would not be subject to amendment and would be guaranteed an up or down vote within a certain timeframe, providing some assurance to U.S. negotiating partners that an agreement they sign with the U.S. Administration will not later be changed by Congress. The Bipartisan Congressional Trade Priorities and Accountability Act of 2015 (P.L. 114-26), which renewed TPA, was signed into law by the President on June 29, 2015.

The political contestation between Tokyo and Okinawa over the relocation of Marine Corps Air Station Futenma appears to be entering a new phase in late 2015. The U.S. and Japanese governments have been working for over a decade to relocate the Futenma base from a crowded urban area to the Henoko shoreline of Camp Schwab, but many Okinawans oppose construction of a new U.S. military facility at this site (see the section "Realignment of the U.S. Military Presence on Okinawa"). Talks between the Japanese central government and the Governor of Okinawa Prefecture Takeshi Onaga, who was elected in November 2014 on a platform opposed to the controversial Futenma base relocation, did not result in a compromise or a change of position by either side. The Japanese government intends to begin constructing the landfill as soon as October 2015 for the planned Futenma replacement facility at the Henoko site. Governor Onaga declared that he would fight the base construction in the courts by revoking the landfill permit that his predecessor approved. Japanese government officials appear confident that the landfill permit is not legally flawed, and they have the authority to continue construction while the courts hear Onaga's case.¹¹ These developments may lead to a phase of intensified political struggle, as Okinawans opposed to the base relocation may escalate protests outside Camp Schwab and take extreme measures to prevent the start of land reclamation at the Henoko site.

Source: Map Resources. Adapted by CRS.

Japan Country Data

In November 2013, China abruptly announced that it would establish an air defense identification zone in the East China Sea, covering the disputed Senkaku/Diaoyu islets as well as airspace that overlaps with the existing ADIZs of Japan, South Korea, and Taiwan. China's announcement produced indignation and anxiety in the region and in Washington for several reasons: the ADIZ represented a new step to pressure—to coerce, some experts argue—Japan's conciliation in the territorial dispute over the islets; China had not consulted with affected countries; the announcement used vague and ominous language that seemed to promise military enforcement within the zone; the requirements for flight notification in the ADIZ go beyond international norms and impinge on the freedom of navigation; and the overlap of ADIZs could lead to accidents or unintended clashes, thus raising the risk of conflict in the East China Sea. Some analysts argue that China's ADIZ also represents a challenge to Japanese administration of the Senkaku/Diaoyu islets, which is the basis of the U.S. treaty commitment to defend that territory.

The U.S. and Japanese governments coordinated at a high level their individual and joint responses to China's ADIZ announcement, and both governments stated that they do not recognize the Chinese ADIZ. Two days after the announcement, the U.S. Air Force flew B-52 bombers on a planned training flight through China's new ADIZ without notifying China, and Japanese military aircraft did the same soon after. For more information and analysis, see CRS Report R43894, China's Air Defense Identification Zone (ADIZ), by [author name scrubbed] and [author name scrubbed].

As of September 2015, Abe and his South Korean counterpart, President Park Geun-hye, have yet to hold a summit. Japan's relations with South Korea have been strained since 2012, a situation that spurred President Obama to convene a trilateral meeting of heads of state on the sidelines of the Nuclear Security Summit in The Hague in March 2014. The meeting focused on cooperation to deal with North Korea's nuclear weapons program, but the underlying goal appeared to be to encourage Seoul and Tokyo to mend their frayed relations. The meeting appears to have opened the door for the two sides to improve their relationship somewhat, leading to more frequent and higher level bilateral meetings in the following months. In late 2014, U.S. defense officials pushed Tokyo and Seoul to sign on to a trilateral intelligence-sharing agreement that enables Japan and South Korea to exchange information regarding North Korea's missile and nuclear threats. As South Korea and Japan marked the 50^th anniversary of their normalization of relations, meetings at the economic and foreign ministers' levels resumed. A poor relationship between Seoul and Tokyo jeopardizes U.S. interests by complicating trilateral cooperation on North Korea policy and on managing China's rise. Tense relations also complicate Japan's desire to expand its military and diplomatic influence, goals the Obama Administration generally supports, as well as the creation of an integrated U.S.-Japan-South Korea ballistic missile defense system.

The persistent Japan-Korea discord centers on history issues. South Korean leaders have objected to a series of statements and actions by Abe and his Cabinet officials that many have interpreted as denying or even glorifying Imperial Japan's aggression in the early 20^th century. Officials in Japan refer to rising "Korea fatigue" among their public and express frustration that for years South Korean leaders have not recognized and in some cases rejected the efforts Japan has made to acknowledge and apologize for Imperial Japan's actions. Past overtures, including a proposal that the previous Japanese government floated in 2012 to provide a new apology and humanitarian payments to the surviving "comfort women," have faltered. In addition to the comfort women issue, the perennial issues of Japanese history textbooks and a territorial dispute between Japan and South Korea continue to periodically rile relations. A group of small islands in the Sea of Japan, known as Dokdo in Korean and Takeshima in Japanese (the U.S. government refers to them as the Liancourt Rocks), are administered by South Korea but claimed by Japan. Japanese statements of the claim in defense documents or by local prefectures routinely spark official criticism and public outcry in South Korea. Similarly, Seoul expresses disapproval of some of the history textbooks approved by Japan's Ministry of Education that South Koreans claim diminish or whitewash Japan's colonial-era atrocities.

Since 2009, Washington and Tokyo have been largely united in their approach to North Korea, driven by Pyongyang's string of missile launches and nuclear tests. Japan has employed a hardline policy toward North Korea, including a virtual embargo on all bilateral trade and vocal leadership at the United Nations to punish the Pyongyang regime for its human rights abuses and military provocations.

In 2014, Abe appeared to adjust his approach to Pyongyang by re-opening talks regarding the long-standing issue of Japanese citizens kidnapped by North Korean agents decades ago. In 2002, then-North Korean leader Kim Jong-il admitted to the abductions and returned five survivors, claiming the others had perished from natural causes. Since that time, Abe has been a passionate champion for the abductees' families and pledged as a leader to bring home all surviving Japanese. In May 2014, back-channel negotiations between Tokyo and Pyongyang yielded an agreement by North Korea to investigate the remaining abductees' fates in exchange for Japan's relaxing some of its unilateral sanctions. By fall 2015, however, many analysts doubt that North Korea will deliver on its promises, and forward progress in bilateral relations appeared limited.

The Abe Administration's foreign policy has displayed elements of both power politics and an emphasis on democratic values, international laws, and norms. Shortly after returning to office, Abe released an article outlining his foreign and security policy strategy titled "Asia's Democratic Security Diamond," which described how the democracies of Japan, Australia, India, and the United States could cooperate to deter Chinese aggression on its maritime periphery.²¹ In Abe's first year in office, Japan held numerous high-level meetings with Asian countries to bolster relations and, in many cases, to enhance security ties. Abe had summit meetings in India, Russia, Great Britain, all 10 countries in the Association of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN), and several countries in the Middle East and Africa. Japan has particularly focused on issues of freedom of navigation in the South China Sea, in part because of the implications for Japan's trade flows and for the Senkakus/Diaoyu dispute. Since 2012, even before Abe came into office, Japan has been working to strengthen the maritime capabilities of Southeast Asian countries such as Vietnam and the Philippines, and Abe has accelerated these efforts, which the Obama Administration has supported.²² This energetic diplomacy indicates a desire to balance China's growing influence with a loose coalition of Asia-Pacific powers, but this strategy of realpolitik is couched in the rhetoric of international laws and democratic values.

Abe's international outreach has yielded positive results. Bilateral ties with Australia are robust; Abe's highly publicized July 2014 visit to Canberra yielded new economic and security arrangements, including an agreement to transfer defense equipment and technology. Japan-Indian ties have blossomed under Abe and Prime Minister Narendra Modi, including expanded military exercises and negotiations on defense export agreements. Overall relations with ASEAN are also strong and provide quiet support for Japan's increasing role in Southeast Asia.

Part of Abe's international diplomacy push has been to reach out to Russia. Japan and the Soviet Union never signed a peace treaty following World War II due to a territorial dispute over four islands north of Hokkaido in the Kuril Chain, known in Japan as the Northern Territories. Both Japan and Russia face security challenges from China and may be seeking a partnership to counter Beijing's growing economic and military power. Ambitious plans to revitalize relations with Moscow, including resolution of the disputed islands, however, have faltered. Russia's aggression in the Ukraine disrupted the improving relationship in 2014. Tokyo signed on to the G7 statement condemning Russia's action and implemented sanctions and asset freezes. Since then, relations have chilled, yet Japan has attempted to salvage the potential breakthrough by imposing only relatively mild sanctions despite pressure from the United States and other Western powers. In fall 2015, it appeared that the two countries were paving the way for Putin to visit Japan before the end of the year. Tokyo may face pressure from the United States to curb any further rapprochement with Moscow due to Russian actions that are perceived to harm U.S. interests in Europe and the Middle East.

Japanese policies conformed to international sanctions on Iran in recent years, restricting international financial transactions, reducing crude oil imports from Iran, and taking other measures. The July 2015 nuclear accord between Iran and the so-called P5+1 (the United States, China, France, Russia, the United Kingdom, and Germany) known as the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action provides for the relief of numerous international sanctions, after the International Atomic Energy Agency certifies that Iran has completed the stipulated nuclear tasks. Many in Japan are hoping to rebuild what had been a robust bilateral trade and investment relationship with Iran, following the expected removal of sanctions in 2016. For more information and analysis on the Iran sanctions, see CRS Report RS20871, Iran Sanctions, by [author name scrubbed].

As part of their efforts to enhance economic penalties on Iran during the 2000s and early 2010s, the Bush and Obama Administrations pushed Japan to curtail its economic ties with Tehran. In general, although Japan was a follower rather than a leader in the international campaign to pressure Tehran, Japanese leaders in recent years cooperated with the U.S.-led effort, reducing significantly what had been a source of tension between Washington and Tokyo. Japan had been a top consumer of Iranian oil exports until 2011, when it significantly curtailed imports in step with international sanctions. Japan's crude oil imports from Iran fell by roughly 40% in 2012 and declined a further 6% in 2013 and 5% in 2014, earning Japan exemptions from U.S. secondary sanctions. Japan restricted the activities of 21 Iranian banks, and many Japanese firms (including energy firms and investors) ceased doing business in Iran, which they viewed as a controversial and risky market.

According to reports, "expectations are high" among some Japanese exporters and energy firms for returning to business in Iran after sanctions are lifted.³¹ The Iranian and Japanese governments began talks on a bilateral investment pact in September 2015. Banks in Japan are said by experts to be the repositories of one-fifth of the approximately $115 billion in foreign exchange (payments for past oil shipments) that Iran holds abroad but could not repatriate because of financial sector sanctions. The Japanese consortium Inpex (Japan's largest oil and gas exploration and production firm) may seek to once again acquire a major stake in Iran's Azadegan oil field, a position that it sold off in 2010 in response to U.S. pressure.³² Some Japanese automakers and machinery manufacturers reportedly are optimistic about the potential for increased exports to Iran.

Japan and the United States cooperate on a wide range of environmental initiatives both bilaterally and through multilateral organizations. In April 2013, Secretary of State John Kerry and the Japanese Foreign Minister launched a new bilateral dialogue to push for a post-2020 international agreement to combat climate change and to cooperate in advancing low-emissions development worldwide. Japan is considered to be closely aligned with the Obama Administration in international climate negotiations in its position that any international climate agreement must be legally binding in a symmetrical way, with all major economies agreeing to the same elements. The U.S. Department of Energy and Japan's Ministry of Energy, Trade, and Industry signed agreements in 2013 to step up civil nuclear cooperation on light-water nuclear reactor research and development (R&D) and nuclear nonproliferation. The U.S.-Japan Bilateral Commission on Civil Nuclear Cooperation focuses on safety and regulatory matters, emergency management, decommissioning and environmental management, civil nuclear energy R&D, and nuclear security. The U.S.-Japan Clean Energy Policy Dialogue (EPD) focuses on clean energy technology and development. Tokyo and Washington also cooperate on climate issues in multilateral and regional frameworks such as the International Energy Agency (IEA), the Asia-Pacific Economic Cooperation (APEC), the Clean Energy Ministerial (CEM), the International Energy Forum (IEF), and the East Asian Summit (EAS). However, because of the shutdown of Japan's nuclear reactors (see below), international observers have raised concerns about losing Japan as a global partner in promoting nuclear safety and nonproliferation measures and in reducing greenhouse gas emissions.³³

March 2011 "Triple Disaster"

On March 11, 2011, a magnitude 9.0 earthquake jolted a wide swath of Honshu, Japan's largest island. The quake, with an epicenter located about 230 miles northeast of Tokyo, generated a tsunami that pounded Honshu's northeastern coast, causing widespread destruction in Miyagi, Iwate, Ibaraki, and Fukushima prefectures. Some 20,000 lives were lost, and entire towns were washed away; over 500,000 homes and other buildings and around 3,600 roads were damaged or destroyed. Up to half a million Japanese were displaced. Damage to several reactors at the Fukushima Dai-ichi nuclear power plant complex led the government to declare a state of emergency and evacuate nearly 80,000 residents within a 20-kilometer radius due to dangerous radiation levels.

In many respects, Japan's response to the multifaceted disaster was remarkable. Over 100,000 troops from the Self Defense Forces (SDF), Japan's military, were deployed quickly to the region. After rescuing nearly 20,000 individuals in the first week, the troops turned to a humanitarian relief mission in the displaced communities. Construction of temporary housing began a week after the quake. Foreign commentators marveled at Japanese citizens' calm resilience, the lack of looting, and the orderly response to the strongest earthquake in the nation's modern history. Japan's preparedness—strict building codes, a tsunami warning system that alerted many to seek higher ground, and years of public drills—likely saved tens of thousands of lives.

Source: Map Resources. Adapted by CRS.

Notes: MCAS is the abbreviation for Marine Corps Air Station. NAF is Naval Air Facility.

($ billions)

Year

Exports

Imports

Balances

1995

-59.1

2000

-81.3

2003

-66.0

2004

-75.2

2005

-82.7

2006

-88.4

2007

-82.8

2008

-72.3

2009

-44.8

2010

-59.8

2011

-62.2

2012

-76.3

2013

-73.4

2014

-67.0

Despite some outstanding issues, tensions in the U.S.-Japan bilateral economic relationship have been much lower than was the case in the 1970s, 1980s, and early 1990s. A number of factors may have contributed to this trend:

• Japan's slow, if not stagnant, economic growth, which began with the burst of the asset bubble in the 1990s and continued as a result of the 2008-2009 financial crisis and the 2011 disasters, has changed the general U.S. perception of Japan from one as an economic competitor to one as a "humbled" economic power;
• the rise of China as an economic power and trade partner has caused U.S. policymakers to shift attention from Japan to China as a source of concern;
• the increased use by both Japan and the United States of the WTO as a forum for resolving trade disputes has de-politicized disputes and helped to reduce friction; and
• shifts in U.S. and Japanese trade policies that have expanded the formation of bilateral and regional trade agreements with other countries have lessened the focus on their bilateral ties.

Between the end of World War II and 1980s, Japan experienced high levels of economic growth. It was dubbed an "economic miracle" until the collapse of an economic bubble in Japan in the early 1990s brought an end to rapid economic growth. Many economists have argued that, despite the government's efforts, Japan has never fully recovered from the 1990s crisis. Japan's economy has suffered from chronic deflation (falling prices) and low growth over the past two decades. Additionally, in the past several years, Japan's economy was hit by two economic crises: the global financial crisis in 2008 and 2009, and the March 2011 earthquake, tsunami, and nuclear reactor meltdowns in northeast Japan (see box on the March 2011 "Triple Disaster").

Prime Minister Abe has made it a priority of his administration to boost economic growth and to eliminate deflation. Abe has promoted a three-pronged, or "three arrow," economic program, nicknamed "Abenomics." The three arrows include monetary stimulus, fiscal stimulus, and structural reforms that improve the competitiveness of Japan's economy. Most economists agree that progress across the three arrows has been uneven.

• The first arrow, monetary stimulus to reverse deflation, has been implemented most aggressively. In the spring of 2013, Japan's central bank (Bank of Japan, or BOJ) announced a continued loose monetary policy with interest rates of 0%, quantitative easing measures, and a target inflation rate of 2%. After Japan's economy slipped back into recession in 2014, the BOJ began a second round of quantitative easing in October 2014. Despite monetary stimulus measures, however, inflation in Japan remains well below the BOJ's target of 2%.
• The Japanese government has also taken some steps to use fiscal policy to stimulate the economy (the second arrow). The government initially implemented fiscal stimulus packages worth about $145 billion, aimed at spending on infrastructure, particularly in the areas affected by the March 2011 disaster. However, the government's willingness to use expansionary fiscal policies has been constrained by concerns about its public debt, the largest in the world at over 240% of GDP. To address the fiscal pressures, the government raised the sales tax from 5% to 8% in April 2014. However, many economists argued that the sales tax increase was responsible for pushing Japan into recession in 2014, and the government postponed a planned second sales tax increase. Additionally, it approved an emergency stimulus package worth about $30 billion in December 2014 to combat the recession.
• Progress on the third arrow, structural reforms, has been more uneven.⁴⁶ The government has made progress on reforming agricultural co-operatives (which have traditionally been a strong vested interest), reforming corporate governance (which has helped increase returns on equity), and has planned to fully liberalize the electricity market by 2016, among other reforms. In other areas, however, progress has been slower. There has been little labor market reform to address Japan's two-tier labor system (permanent vs. temporary employees), resistance to more liberal immigration policies (which could help bring in workers needed to offset Japan's rapidly aging population), and corporate taxes (which, despite some cuts, remain among the highest in the world). In July 2015, the IMF urged the Japanese government to swiftly implement reforms that had already been announced as well as pursue additional "high-impact" reforms, that would lift the labor supply, reduce labor market duality, and continue agricultural and services sector deregulation.⁴⁷ Some analysts have noted that the structural reform agenda appears to have lost some steam over the past year as Abe has spent significant political capital pushing defense legislation.⁴⁸

In terms of the economic impact of "Abenomics" to date, results have been mixed. As noted above, Japan's economy slipped back into recession in 2014. This was Japan's fourth recession since 2008, and was largely attributed to the April 2014 sales tax increase. However, Japan's economy started recovering in the fourth quarter of 2014, and in July 2015, the IMF projected that Japan's economy will grow by 0.8% in 2015 and 1.2% in 2016.⁴⁹ The IMF argues that structural reforms have improved long-term prospects modestly but that Abenomics needs to be "reloaded," particularly with the identification and pursuit of additional structural reforms.⁵⁰ The IMF has also stressed that a medium-term fiscal consolidation plan is needed to put the debt on a downward path and that the BOJ should be ready to engage in additional monetary stimulus as needed. Some experts are skeptical about the government's willingness to push through economic reforms. In September, a major credit rating agency, Standard & Poor's, downgraded Japan's long-term credit rating, saying it sees little chance of the Abe government turning around the poor outlook for economic growth and inflation over the next few years.⁵¹

A key component of the third arrow focuses on "womenomics," or boosting economic growth through reforms and policies to encourage the participation and advancement of women in the workforce. Japan lags behind many other high-income countries in terms of gender equality, with one of the lowest rates of female participation in the workforce among Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development countries. A strategist with Goldman Sachs in Japan estimates that closing the gender employment gap could boost Japan's GDP by nearly 13%.⁵² To advance its "womenomics" initiative, the government has proposed, and is in various stages of implementing, a number of policies, such as expanding the availability of day care, increasing parental leave benefits, and allowing foreign housekeepers in special economic zones, among other measures. Although some are optimistic that the measures will help close the gender gap in Japan, and Japanese female employment has reached a record high under the new policies.⁵³ However, others express concern about potential challenges, such as a work culture that demands long hours and makes it hard to balance work and family. Additionally, some argue that Japan's workplace remains "rife" with illegal and overt harassment of pregnant workers.⁵⁴ For further information, see CRS Report R43668, "Womenomics" in Japan: In Brief.

The proposed TPP is an evolving regional free trade agreement (FTA). Originally formed as an FTA among Singapore, New Zealand, Chile, and Brunei, the TPP is now an agreement under negotiation among the original four countries plus the United States, Australia, Canada, Mexico, Peru, Malaysia, Vietnam, and Japan. The negotiators envision a comprehensive and high standard agreement to liberalize trade and to establish enhanced trade rules and disciplines. They also envision the TPP to be a "21^st century" framework for governing trade within the Asia-Pacific region by addressing new trade barriers and cross-cutting issues, such as regulatory coherence, global supply chains, digital trade, and state-owned enterprises.

As the second-largest East Asian economy and a crucial link in Asian production networks, Japan's participation in the TPP is economically significant, although it continues to be the subject of debate within the Japanese political leadership and among Japanese and U.S. stakeholders. In deciding to participate in the TPP, Abe confronted influential domestic interests that argued against the move. Among the most vocal have been Japanese farmers, especially rice farmers, and their representatives. They argue that Japanese agriculture will be severely harmed by foreign competition if Japan removes its high tariffs and other protective measures on imports of agricultural products. Some Japanese health providers have argued that Japan's national health insurance system will be adversely affected because, they claim, the TPP could force Japanese citizens to buy foreign-produced pharmaceuticals and medical devices. Abe has acknowledged those domestic sensitivities, but has also insisted that Japan needs to be part of TPP to support economic growth. Other Japanese business interests, including manufacturers, strongly support the TPP.

Underlying Abe's decision to enter the TPP talks is a growing feeling among many Japanese that, after two decades of relatively sluggish growth, Japan's economic and political influence is waning in comparison with China and with middle powers such as South Korea. The rapid aging and gradual shrinking of Japan's population have added to a sense among many in Japan that the country needs to develop new sources of growth to maintain, if not increase, the country's living standards.

If an agreement is reached, Japan's membership in the proposed TPP would constitute a de facto U.S.-Japan FTA. Japan's participation enhances the clout and viability of the proposed TPP, which is called the economic centerpiece of the Obama Administration's rebalance to the Asia-Pacific region. When Japan entered the talks, the share of the world economy accounted for by TPP countries rose from around about 30% to about 38%. The negotiations could force the two countries to address long-standing, difficult trade issues, and if successful, arguably could reinvigorate the bilateral relationship. On the other hand, failure to resolve these bilateral issues could indicate that the underlying problems are too fundamental to overcome, which could set back the relationship.

U.S. bilateral negotiations with Japan have proven challenging. (As discussed in the accompanying text box, the separate U.S.-Japan negotiations are occurring in parallel with the plurilateral TPP talks.) On many of the non-tariff issues in the agreement, such as intellectual property rights protections, U.S. and Japanese goals are reportedly closely aligned. In the areas of auto and agricultural trade, however, negotiations have reportedly been more difficult. U.S. automakers are closely watching the negotiations and have expressed concerns over reducing U.S. auto import tariffs without greater reciprocal access to the Japanese market and provisions preventing currency manipulation for export gain. Although U.S. auto exports to Japan face no tariff, U.S. import penetration is low, which U.S. automakers partially blame on allegedly discriminatory regulations and other non-tariff measures. On agriculture, Japan has been reluctant to remove certain import protections on several products including rice and pork, while some U.S. industry groups strongly oppose any agricultural carve-outs and have suggested that the TPP be concluded without Japan if Japan refuses to provide sufficient market access.

Emphasis appears to have shifted, however, to resolving differences in the broader 12-country talks, suggesting that U.S.-Japan bilateral issues may have been largely resolved. For example, on automotive rules of origin, which determine how much of the value of a product must come from within the TPP region to receive duty-free treatment, the United States and Japan reportedly reached an agreement that was subsequently opposed by Canada and Mexico. As U.S. partners in the North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA), they reportedly felt the U.S.-Japan agreed-upon rule of origin threshold was too low and would undermine tightly integrated North American auto production networks.⁵⁵ A lower rule of origin threshold would allow Japan, or any other TPP country, to utilize a greater share of non-TPP components and still receive duty-free treatment for its exports within the TPP region. Given the importance of the automotive sector in U.S.-Japan trade, resolving this issue will be critical to a final TPP agreement.

Japan is also participating in other bilateral and regional trade negotiations in the Asia-Pacific. The most significant of these in terms of membership is the Regional Comprehensive Economic Partnership (RCEP), which would join Japan with the 10 members of the Association of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN), China, South Korea, Australia, New Zealand, and India in a regional trade agreement. While not ostensibly in conflict with the TPP, some have suggested the RCEP could be a less ambitious alternative to the more comprehensive TPP, and thus, perhaps easier to conclude. While RCEP would include some TPP partners, the absence of the United States and the inclusion of China is noteworthy.⁵⁶ In 2013, Japan began negotiating a trilateral FTA with China and South Korea. The Japan-Australia Economic Partnership Agreement entered into force on January 15, 2015.

The first "arrow" of Abenomics, expansionary monetary policies, has contributed to a depreciation of the yen against the U.S. dollar. In mid-2012, the yen was valued at an average of 79 yen (¥) per dollar. Since that time, the yen has depreciated by about 50% against the dollar, to 120 yen (¥) per dollar in early September 2015, similar to the value of the yen against the dollar in 2007.⁵⁷ Some policymakers and analysts allege that Japan is manipulating its exchange rate to drive down the value of the yen and boost its exports at the expense of other countries, including the United States. Japanese officials deny any manipulation of the yen. Some analysts argue that Japan's monetary policies, similar to the Fed's quantitative easing programs, are aimed at boosting economic growth and that any impact on the value of the yen is a side effect, rather than the goal, of the policies.⁵⁸

Some Members of Congress and analysts have expressed concerns about Japan's currency policies and have pushed for "currency manipulation" to be addressed in the proposed TPP.⁵⁹ The TPA legislation signed into law in June 2015 (P.L. 114-26) includes principal negotiating objectives to address currency manipulation. They seek to prevent and address currency manipulation, particularly protracted, large-scale interventions in foreign exchange markets, through multiple possible remedies. Reportedly, the Treasury Department is working to negotiate provisions aimed at preventing currency manipulation in the context of TPP, but the provisions are not expected to be part of a TPP deal itself.⁶⁰ The application of countervailing duties on imports from countries with undervalued exchange rates is also being debated in the context of the Trade Facilitation and Trade Enforcement Act (H.R. 644).

Proposals to address "currency manipulation" in TPP or through other means are controversial. Some argue that seeking to include currency issues in a trade agreement is not a straightforward process and could make the agreement more difficult to conclude. There is also disagreement among economists about how to define currency manipulation and what benchmarks should be used. Still others question whether currency manipulation is a significant problem. They raise questions about whether government policies have long-term effects on exchange rates; whether it is possible to differentiate between "manipulation" and legitimate central bank activities; and the net effect of currency manipulation on the U.S. economy.

Some Japanese and Western analysts argue that one factor contributing to Abe's strength in his current stint in office is his government's and the LDP's success in managing the Japanese media. According to these sources, the government and the LDP have attempted to cow Japanese news outlets through measures such as hinting at revoking licenses of broadcasters, pressuring business groups not to purchase advertisements in certain media outlets, and shunning reporters from critical broadcasters and print publications.⁶¹ In 2013, Abe appointed a new head of Japan's public broadcaster, NHK, who said that the network should not deviate too far from the government's views. Criticism from a number of media sources, particularly the left-of-center newspaper Asahi Shimbun, played a role in curtailing Abe's short-lived first term in office (2006-2007). Many accuse the Abe government of launching a campaign to discredit the Asahi.⁶² Since Abe came to power in December 2012, the non-governmental organization Reporters without Borders has moved Japan down eight places, to 61^st place, in its rankings of global freedom of the press.⁶³ Abe government officials deny that they have attempted to unduly influence the press or restrict press freedoms.

(The LDP and its partner, Komeito, control the Lower House, which elects the prime minister)

Source: Open Source Center, "Breakdown of Lower House Election Results," December 15, 2014.

Notes: The Lower House's official name is the "House of Representatives." The Lower House must be dissolved, and elections held for all Members' seats, at least once every four years. The last such elections were held in December 2014.

(The LDP-Komeito coalition controls the Upper House)

Source: Website of the Upper House of the Japanese Diet, December 14, 2014.

Notes: The Upper House's official name is the "House of Councillors." Upper House members serve for six-year terms, with elections for half the Members occurring every three years. The last Upper House elections were held in July 2013.

The December 2012 parliamentary elections drastically reduced the size of Japan's largest opposition party, the Democratic Party of Japan (DPJ), which was the ruling party from 2009 to 2012. The DPJ's party support numbers have remained in the single digits since it lost its hold on power. Although the party gained nearly 20 seats in the 2014 Lower House election, it holds less than a third of the 230 seats it held when it was the ruling party. Formed in the late 1990s by an amalgamation of former conservative and progressive politicians, the party continues to be riven by divisions among its more hawkish and dovish factions, as well as among its market-oriented and socialist factions, that manifested themselves in 2015 in debates over collective self-defense legislation and the TPP. On January 18, 2015, the DPJ chose its former head Katsuya Okada as party president.

Over the past 20 years, growing frustration with Japan's political status quo has periodically given rise to small-to-moderate protest movements. One party that has emerged in recent years is the Japan Innovation Party (JIP), formerly led by Osaka mayor Toru Hashimoto, who among other programs champions economic deregulation and decentralization of political power to Japan's regional governments. In 2015, Hashimoto left the JIP and announced his intention to form a new party, a move that is expected to split the JIP. Hashimoto is known to support nationalist positions on matters of security and history, and thus could perhaps be a natural ad hoc ally for Abe on these matters, as well as on some economic issues. During the 2015 debate over Abe's security legislation, the DPJ cooperated with some of the anti-Hashimoto forces in the JIP, and some in the DPJ have talked openly about joining forces with these JIP members to form a bigger opposition bloc.

Compared to most industrialized democracies, the Japanese parliament is structurally weak, as is the office of the prime minister and his cabinet. Though former Prime Minister Koizumi and his immediate predecessors increased politicians' influence relative to bureaucrats', with important exceptions Japan's policymaking process tends to be compartmentalized and bureaucratized, making it difficult to make trade-offs among competing constituencies on divisive issues. The result is often paralysis or incremental changes at the margins of policy, particularly during periods of weak premierships such as the one Japan experienced from 2006 to 2013. These difficulties were a major reason Abe took the unprecedented decision in early 2013 to house Japan's TPP negotiating team in the prime minister's office, in the hopes that this would help overcome the bureaucratic obstacles to making the trade-offs that are likely to be necessary to enable Japan's joining a final agreement, if one is reached.

Japan's combination of a low birth rate, strict immigration practices, and a shrinking and rapidly aging population presents policymakers with a significant challenge. Polls suggest that Japanese women are avoiding marriage and child-bearing because of the difficulty of combining career and family in Japan; the fertility rate has fallen to 1.25, far below the 2.1 rate necessary to sustain population size. Japan's population growth rate is -0.1%, and its current population of 127 million is projected to fall to about 95 million by mid-century. Concerns about a huge shortfall in the labor force have grown, particularly as the elderly demand more care. The ratio of working age persons to retirees is projected to fall from 5:2 around 2010 to 3:2 in 2040, reducing the resources available to pay for the government social safety net.⁶⁴ Japan's immigration policies have traditionally been strictly limited, closing one potential source of new workers.

P.L. 113-291. Carl Levin and Howard P. "Buck" McKeon National Defense Authorization Act for FY2015. Section 2821 removes prior restrictions on DOD spending to implement the realignment of the Marine Corps from Okinawa to Guam, including DOD expenditure of Japanese government funds transferred for that purpose. Section 1251 requires DOD to develop a strategy to prioritize U.S. defense interests in the Asia-Pacific region. Section 1255 encourages greater cooperation among the United States and its partners in Northeast Asia on ballistic missile defense. Section 1258 reaffirms Congress's support for the U.S.-Japan alliance, including Japan's initiative to engage in collective self-defense. Became law on December 19, 2014.

P.L. 113-66. National Defense Authorization Act for FY2014. Section 2822 prohibits DOD spending (including expenditure of funds provided by the Japanese government) to implement the realignment of the Marine Corps from Okinawa to Guam, with certain exceptions, until DOD provides reports to Congress. The bill requests a report on U.S. force posture strategy in the Asia-Pacific region, a master plan for military construction on Guam and Hawaii, and a plan for upgrades to the civilian infrastructure on Guam. Became law on December 26, 2013.

Author Contact Information

Footnotes

This calculation does not include the one year of Abe's first stint as Prime Minister in 2006 and 2007.

"Abe Cabinet's Approval Rating Falls to 38.5% in Latest Opinion Poll," The Japan Times. September 11, 2015.

"Abe-Park First Summit Eyed for Late October," The Japan Times. September 3, 2015.

Sheila Smith, "Japan's Diet Uproar," Asia Unbound. July 15, 2015.

"Thousands Protest Abe, Security Bills at Diet Rally," The Japan Times. August 30, 2015.

For more on the TPP negotiations, see CRS Report R42694, The Trans-Pacific Partnership (TPP) Negotiations and Issues for Congress, coordinated by [author name scrubbed].

For more on the Maui Ministerial, see CRS Insight IN10337, The TPP After Maui, by [author name scrubbed] and [author name scrubbed].

USTR, "Update on the Trans-Pacific Partnership Negotiations," press release, August 2015, https://ustr.gov/about-us/policy-offices/press-office/reports-and-publications/2015/update-trans-pacific-partnership.

"Pacific Rim Free Trade Talks Falls Short of Deal," Reuters, August 1, 2015.

For more on TPA, see CRS Report RL33743, Trade Promotion Authority (TPA) and the Role of Congress in Trade Policy, by [author name scrubbed]; CRS Report R43491, Trade Promotion Authority (TPA): Frequently Asked Questions, by [author name scrubbed] and [author name scrubbed]; and CRS In Focus IF10038, Trade Promotion Authority (TPA), by [author name scrubbed].

Eric Johnston, "Okinawa governor moves to revoke approval for Futenma replacement work," Japan Times, September 14, 2015.

See, for instance, Asia Policy Point, The Abe Administration Cabinet 2012-2014, August 2, 2014.

John Breen, ed., Yasukuni, the War Dead and the Struggle for Japan's Past (New York: Columbia University Press, 2008).

"Statement on Prime Minister Abe's December 26 Visit to Yasukuni Shrine," U.S. Embassy in Tokyo, Japan, December 26, 2013, http://japan.usembassy.gov/e/p/tp-20131226-01.html.

In the 113^th Congress, the 2014 Consolidated Appropriations Act (P.L. 113-76, H.R. 3547) indirectly referred to this resolution. P.L. 113-76's conference committee issued a Joint Explanatory Statement that called on Federal Agencies to implement directives contained in the July 2013 H.Rept. 113-185, which in turn "urge[d] the Secretary of State to encourage the Government of Japan to address the issues raised" in H.Res. 121.

In April 2012, Tokyo governor Shintaro Ishihara announced in Washington, DC, that he intended to purchase three of the five islets from their private Japanese owner. Ishihara, who is known for expressing nationalist views, called for demonstrating Japan's control over the islets by building installations on the island and raised nearly $20 million in private donations for the purchase. In September, the central government purchased the three islets for ¥2.05 billion (about $26 million at an exchange rate of ¥78:$1) to block Ishihara's move and reduce tension with China.

"Chinese Ships Continue Patrol Around Diaoyu Island," China Daily, October 28, 2012.

"Japan Scrambles Jets in Islands Dispute with China," New York Times, December 13, 2012.

Statistics provided by the Japanese Ministry of Foreign Affairs, http://www.mofa.go.jp/region/page23e_000021.html.

Speaking in Japan in April 2014, President Obama stated that "Article 5 covers all territories under Japan's administration, including the Senkaku Islands," in what is believed to be the first time a U.S. President publically has stated the United States' position. The White House, "Joint Press Conference with President Obama and Prime Minister Abe of Japan," Akasaka Palace, Tokyo, Japan, April 24, 2014.

Shinzo Abe, "Asia's Democratic Security Diamond," Project Syndicate, December 27, 2012.

Testifying before the Senate Armed Services Committee on September 17, 2015, Assistant Secretary of Defense for Asian and Pacific Security Affairs David Shear said, "We strongly support Japanese efforts to coordinate with us in building partner capacity, particularly with countries like Vietnam, the Philippines, and probably in the future, Malaysia."

"U.S. Fathers Urge Japan to Comply with Child Custody Treaty," Kyodo News Agency, March 31, 2014.

"Hague Reduces Child Abductions," Yomiuri Shimbun, July 6, 2014. CRS interviews with State Department officials in November 2014 confirmed that the rate of new U.S.-Japan custody cases declined significantly after April 2014.

U.S. State Department, "Press Availability on International Parent Child Abduction," Kurt Campbell, Assistant Secretary, Bureau of East Asian and Pacific Affairs, February 2, 2010.

Koji Kawamura, "Japan Implements Domestic Law Concerning the Convention on the Civil Aspects of International Child Abduction," Monday Business Briefing, April 4, 2014.

By various estimates, approximately 40% held in the Japanese camps died in captivity, compared to 1%-3% of the U.S. prisoners in Nazi Germany's POW camps. Thousands more died in transit to the camps, most notoriously in the 1942 "Bataan Death March," in which the Imperial Japanese military force-marched almost 80,000 starving, sick, and injured Filipino and U.S. troops over 60 miles to prison camps in the Philippines. For more, see out-of-print CRS Report RL30606, U.S. Prisoners of War and Civilian American Citizens Captured and Interned by Japan in World War II: The Issue of Compensation by Japan, by Gary Reynolds (available from the co-authors of this report).

S.Res. 333 (Feinstein) was introduced and passed by unanimous consent on November 17, 2011. H.Res. 324 (Honda) and H.Res. 333 (Honda) were introduced on June 22, 2011, and June 24, 2011, respectively, and referred to the House Foreign Affairs Subcommittee on Asia and the Pacific.

"Mitsubishi Materials Apologizes for Using US Prisoners of War as Slave Labor," The Guardian. July 19, 2015.

"Japanese Companies Looking to Iran after Nuclear Accord," Jiji Press Service, July 15, 2015.

"Iran Official Says Possible for Japan to Return to Oil Field Project," Kyodo News Agency, July 20, 2015.

Hideshi Futori, "Japan's Role in Asia's Nuclear Security," Woodrow Wilson Center, February 10, 2014.

Masakazu Toyoda, "Energy Policy in Japan: Challenges after Fukushima," Institute of Energy Economics, Japan, presentation prepared for delivery on January 24, 2013.

"Strategic Energy Plan," Japan Ministry of Economy, Trade, and Industry, April 2014, http://www.enecho.meti.go.jp/en/category/others/basic_plan/pdf/4th_strategic_energy_plan.pdf.

"Over Half Oppose Japan Engaging in Collective Self-Defense: Survey," Kyodo News Agency, January 26, 2014. "30% Approve of Raising Sales Tax to 10% as Scheduled; Cabinet Support Flat," Nikkei, August 25, 2014.

Japan currently imports less than 1% of its natural gas supply from Alaska.

Article 51 of the U.N. Charter provides that member nations may exercise the rights of both individual and collective self-defense if an armed attack occurs.

Article 9 of the Japanese constitution, drafted by American officials during the post-war occupation, outlaws war as a "sovereign right" of Japan and prohibits "the right of belligerency," stipulating that "land, sea, and air forces, as well as other war potential, will never be maintained."

The relocation of the Futenma base is part of a larger bilateral agreement developed by the U.S.-Japan Special Action Committee on Okinawa (SACO) in 1996. In the SACO Final Report, the United States agreed to return approximately 20% of land used for U.S. facilities on Okinawa, including all or parts of a dozen sites. Handover of MCAS Futenma was contingent on "maintaining the airfield's critical military functions and capabilities." The plan for implementing the SACO agreement evolved over the late 1990s and early 2000s until Washington and Tokyo settled on a "roadmap" in 2006: once Japan constructed the Futenma replacement facility at the Henoko site, the United States would relocate roughly 8,000 marines from Okinawa to Guam, about half of the U.S. Marine Corps (USMC) presence then on Okinawa. In 2012, the allies revised the implementation plan to "de-link" the Futenma relocation and the realignment of marines to Guam. The 2012 agreement also revised the USMC realignment: 9,000 marines would be relocated from Okinawa; 4,700 to Guam; 2,500 to Australia (on a rotational basis); and the remainder to Hawaii and the continental United States.

"Okinawa Gov. Says Approval to be Revoked for Base Relocation Work," Kyodo News Agency, September 14, 2015.

U.S. Congress, Senate Committee on Armed Services, Inquiry into U.S. Costs and Allied Contributions to Support the U.S. Military Presence Overseas, 113^th Cong., April 15, 2013, S.Rept. 113-12 (Washington: GPO, 2013).

Ibid.

Brad Roberts, "Extended Deterrence and Strategic Stability in Northeast Asia," National Institute of Defense Studies (Japan), Visiting Scholar Paper Series, No. 1, August 9, 2013.

Roberts (2013).

Robin Harding and Leo Lewis, "The Third Arrow of Abenomics: A Scorecard," Financial Times, September 9, 2015.

IMF, "IMF Executive Board Concludes 2015 Article IV Consultation with Japan," July 23, 2015.

Linda Sieg and Kaori Kaneko, "Japan's Abe Unlikely to Tackle Hard Reforms in Next Term: Economists," Reuters, September 7, 2015.

IMF, World Economic Outlook Update, July 9, 2015.

IMF, "IMF Executive Board Concludes 2015 Article IV Consultation with Japan," July 23, 2015.

Keiko Ujikane, "Japan Rating Cut by S&P as Abe Falls Short of Early Promise," Bloomberg, September 16, 2015.

Kathy Matsui et al., "Womenomics 4.0: Time to Walk the Talk," Goldman Sachs, May 30, 2014, http://www.goldmansachs.com/our-thinking/investing-in-women/womenomics4-folder/womenomics4-time-to-talk-the-talk.pdf.

Robin Harding and Leo Lewis, "The Third Arrow of Abenomics: A Scorecard," Financial Times, September 9, 2015.

"Women and Work in Japan," Economist, September 5, 2015.

Currently, Canada and Mexico enjoy preferential access to the U.S. auto market under NAFTA. A lower rule of origin threshold in the TPP would make it easier for products made in any TPP country (such as Japan) to receive the preferential treatment granted under the terms of the TPP, and could erode the advantage of locating manufacturing plants in Canada and Mexico to serve the U.S. market. See, for example, "Conservatives Rush to Resolve TPP Auto-Parts Impasse before Election," The Globe and Mail, September 16, 2015.

See, for example, Beginda Pakpahan, "Will RCEP Compete with the TPP?" EastAsiaForum, http://www.eastasiaforum.org.

Federal Reserve.

For more information about exchange rates and "currency manipulation," see CRS In Focus IF10049, Debates over "Currency Manipulation", by [author name scrubbed], and CRS Report R43242, Current Debates over Exchange Rates: Overview and Issues for Congress, by [author name scrubbed].

In 2013, 230 Representatives and 60 Senators sent letters to the Obama Administration calling for "currency manipulation" to be addressed in TPP.

"Treasury Says It Is Negotiating on Currency in Context of TPP," Inside U.S. Trade, July 29, 2015.

Aurelia George Mulgan, "Shinzo Abe's 'Glass Jaw' and Media Muzzling in Japan," The Diplomat, May 08, 2015; Martin Fackler, "Effort by Japan to Stifle News Media Is Working," New York Times, April 26, 2015; Robin Harding, "Shinzo Abe Accused of 'Emasculating Japanese Media,'" Financial Times, June 29, 2015; "German Journalist's Parting Shot to Abe over Press Freedom Causes Stir," Asahi Shimbun, April 28, 2015.

Ibid.

Reporters without Borders, http://index.rsf.org/#!/index-details/JPN, accessed September 17, 2015.

Lynann Butkiewicz, "Implications of Japan's Changing Demographics," National Bureau of Asian Research, Washington, DC, October 2012.